19-Apr-2024 01:01 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 187 items in your selection (but only 37 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 187]
[News] Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardwareANN.lu
Posted on 25-May-2002 20:50 GMT by Seehund187 comments
View flat
View list
There's a petition aimed at Amiga Inc. set up at http://www.petitiononline.com/amigaos/ for all those who disagree with Amiga Inc's presented plans regarding compulsory OS/hardware bundling and licensing. An excerpt from the petition:

On April 12th, 2002, you, Amiga Inc., published your plans regarding distribution policies for the forthcoming AmigaOS4 in an "Executive Update" on your web site.

In short, what you say and what we the undersigned object against is this:

* Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS.

* Such hardware and its distributors must be approved and licensed by Amiga Inc. and the hardware distributors must also sell and support AmigaOS4.

* AmigaOS will only be available bundled with such hardware.

We think that the above will seriously hurt AmigaOS users, the POP/PPC hardware market and thus ultimately you, Amiga Inc., yourselves.
To read the entire petition and sign it, please click here.

Before those imagining sides, factions, camps and personal enemies everywhere start commenting, it must be emphasised that this poll is not intended to "promote" anything else than the success of AmigaOS, the POP/PPC hardware market, free choice and ethical business practices.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 151 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 27-May-2002 14:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 144 (DaveW):
>Yeah thats right - technicalities, thats all it is Smithy.
>[blah, blah...]
Please re-read what I said. I said that people won't be signing the petition because of the original reasons, they will be signing it because they disagree with Amiga Inc's general direction and want to send a message.
It's obvious that a lot of people feel disenchanted with Amiga Inc. You don't have to look at that petition - just browse some Amiga messageboards or the newsgroups to see how feeling is running.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 152 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by SC on 27-May-2002 15:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 151 (smithy):
If this is true, it should worry Amiga regardless. If a lot of people sign the petitionfor the "right" reasons, they should worry about the popularity of their licensing plans - and reconsider.
If a lot of people sign it for the "wrong" reasons, Amiga should worry for it's *general* popularity.
The higher Amiga's "popularity" ratings, the more products they will sell, the more developers will write software for them, and the more help they'll havefrom the users.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 153 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-May-2002 16:38 GMT
The person who started that petition is obviously an idiot and needs to buy a pair of glasses to read properly.
Most of the people who agree on such crap have no brains.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 154 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by SlimJim on 27-May-2002 16:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 152 (SC):
The funny thing is that there are people that put their name on it and then
comment that they DON'T support the petition... (?!)
.
SlimJim
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 155 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Björn Hagaström on 27-May-2002 17:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (SlimJim):
Some people are signing other persons to the petition. An thus invalidating all of it.
I haven't signed it, but it wouldn't surprise me if someone has added me anyway.
/Björn
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 156 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 27-May-2002 18:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 151 (smithy):
[blah blah]
Please re-read what I said. You took issues with me and others pointing out the petition is flawed because it claims to summarise the executive summary with three assertions of which two do not exist in the summary. Thats just a technical issue. How do you think AInc will see it based on those two whopping flaws? A credible petition? No.
Sure people are disenchanted with AInc, but people are disenchanted with MOS, with BPlan and with those that are so disenchanted they post unsubstantiated crap about AInc! You only have to look on ANN to see that.
The signing mechanism is flawed because anyone can post anyone elses names, no validation is taking place and it appears that people have not actually read it before posting. Some of the signatures are going to be based on what is in the petition - but they are signing a flawed petition!
Having created, signed and worked with petitions before it does you no good whatsoever to make assertions without pointing to the evidence where those assertions have been made. It also does you no good to incorrectly summarise a document and invent new parts to a document which do not exist.
Sure, do petitions. But do it correctly!
Technicalities. Jee whizz.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 157 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 27-May-2002 18:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 147 (gz):
If you are accusing Amiga Inc of unethical business practices you are making in effect a slanderous statement, in public.
Whilst the chances of AInc taking you to court are very slim it does you no credit whatsoever to indulge in this.
I dont give a flying f*ck whether it offends me or not.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 158 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 27-May-2002 18:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 150 (gz):
> And BTW. This is a public forum for PERSONAL thoughts.
Oh really?
If you make a statement that is libellous about a third party to one other person then you are subject to the law. Regardless of whether or not its a personal thought or not and regardless of media. There have been cases of people being taken to court and sued mightily for doing stuff like this.
Accusing AInc of unethical business practices is a serious allegation. I doubt that AInc will give a t*ss about what small fry like yourself say in public so you are unlikely to be subject to legal action. However you should be careful about making such statements, if you do this with frequency you increase the likelyhood that you get a whopping legal clip around the earhole.
Especially if the plaintiff is a citizen or a business in the USofA, capital of litigation frenzy.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 159 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 27-May-2002 19:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 158 (DaveW):
>If you make a statement that is libellous about a third party to one other person then you are subject to the law. >Regardless of whether or not its a personal thought or not and regardless of media. >There have been cases of people being taken to court and sued mightily for doing stuff like this.
Hmmm... Technically you may be right in your frenzy of nitpicking, however the same thing applies to you and everyone on this public forum. Should we all stop exchanging our personal thoughts here because we might get sued by AInc, bplan, hyperion, eyetech and h&p to name a few? What you suggest above could be sanely applied if I was somehow agitating and recruiting people to revolt against amiga inc.
I have seen you posting your own personal opinions about morphos and bplan and I have no problem with that as they are your own thoughts presented in public.
Yet it hasn't ever crossed my mind to start accusing you of making "political" allegations, when in fact you are just using your right of free speech and thinking in a democratic society.
If the actions you are talking about above would be applied to ann forums, 80% of people here could be sued, depending on the subject. It wouldn't make much sence to have a public forum where you weren't allowed to say your personal opinion.
It would be different if you were a company thinking out loud.
>you should be careful about making such statements, if you do this with frequency you increase the >likelyhood that you get a whopping legal clip around the earhole.
>Dave.
Come on man, listen to what your saying =D AInc could sue half the ann forum visitors to court for posting their personal opinions online?
That's scary shit... Sounds like somekind of nasty scifi movie where the future is dominated by evil facist companies enslaving the people.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 160 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 27-May-2002 20:54 GMT
In reply to Comment 159 (gz):
> That's scary shit... Sounds like somekind of nasty scifi movie where the future
> is dominated by evil facist companies enslaving the people.
I'm working on that right now... 3:) (evil laugh)
You have gotta be fair in what you write though. I don't think that AmigaInc would bother with a post on ANN of course.
But unethical marketing? What marketing has there been to be unethical?! ;)
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 161 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 27-May-2002 21:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Graham):
English is not my main language and sometimes it can lead me using terms that are not best suited for an occasion. It seems there might be a case of that here.
By using the term "unethical" marketing I mean't my personal opinion about Ainc's current licensing policy. It doesen't seem ethical in my opinion to try and force HW manufacturers under certain licencing certification if they want to sell HW on a market. Also it seems dubious to me that they are required to bundle a copy of AmigaOS with the HW.
The licensing can in worst possible case limit us to certain hardware and software only endorsed by Amiga Inc. In a very small community, specialized HW is expensive and there is a danger of price exceeding it's technical worth.
It's the danger of users left without more than one or two expensive options that scares me.
Anyways I wan't to withdraw the term unethical marketing from my comments because it seems to have caused a lot of confusion. I just couldn't think of any other term with my lame english.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 162 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by ch on 27-May-2002 22:07 GMT
unethical markeeting? just look at the party pack..
that was a great fleecing of wallets. they should be proud
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 163 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Graham on 27-May-2002 22:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 161 (gz):
> By using the term "unethical" marketing I mean't my personal opinion about
> Ainc's current licensing policy. It doesen't seem ethical in my opinion to try
> and force HW manufacturers under certain licencing certification if they want
> to sell HW on a market. Also it seems dubious to me that they are required to
> bundle a copy of AmigaOS with the HW.
Well, as has been pointed out, if I wanted to sell my Xyzzy PPC motherboard into the Amiga market, I go to Amiga and get it certified, and then I can sell it into the Amiga market, with the OS at the same time. Certainly no worse than has ever happened in the Amiga ever before, better because you can choose your AmigaOS enabled hardware now, before you were stuck with Commodore! Of course, things do change, and people like building their own computers now. But I fail to see what the difference is between "buy (motherboard with OS4)" and "buy (motherboard) and buy (OS4) separately".
This does not mean that I suddenly cannot sell my Xyzzy PPC motherboard into other markets anymore either.
AmigaOS4 comes with the Amiga compliant version of the board simply because the board possibly comes with AmigaOS4 components on it already - the dongle rom is one example.
However, I would like to see AmigaOS4 available as a separate product eventually, as it matures and other PPC hardware starts to appear on the market. I also would like to know about what happens if you want to move your AmigaOS license from one PPC machine to another new one, and then use Linux on the old hardware - there doesn't seem to be a way of doing this at all under the current scheme. It looks like you must buy another copy of AmigaOS4, even if you don't want it.
But for now, the current system is more than acceptable, especially when trying to revive the market again initially. There is only one PPC motherboard for AmigaOS4 anyway (AmigaOneG3-SE), and people buying it will want OS4 for obvious reasons (they are buying an AmigaOne!), so there are no problems.
Graham
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 164 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Seehund on 27-May-2002 23:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 156 (DaveW):
DaveW wrote:
> You took issues with me and others pointing out the petition is flawed
> because it claims to summarise the executive summary with three assertions
> of which two do not exist in the summary.
What, pray tell, is so incorrect that it would flaw the petition?
Let me guess...
Quote:
"In *SHORT* [added emphasis], what you say and what we the undersigned object against is this:
* Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS."
So, someone named Ben Hermans at a company called Hyperion has said in an online forum that this "boot ROM" (which is a direct quote from the linked executive update, supposedly written after "consultation with partners, developers...") as a physical ROM chip in a socket is only an issue for a POP mobo labelled A1G3SE. Somehow the solution of a licensee made its way into a list of company policies at the licensor's web site? Odd.
After the petition went online, this Ben Hermans even said that these "OS4 specific extensions" wouldn't have to reside in the BIOS at all.
Now let's believe this Ben Hermans person for a moment. What would this change? If you're interested in AmigaOS4 it changes nothing at all, as long as the compulsory licensing and compulsory OS/hardware bundling still are valid. What good is e.g. a USB dongle over a perverted BIOS if you still aren't allowed to buy your own choice of hardware and buy AmigaOS separately? It's, to use Smithy's words, a technicality. Fundamentally meaningless. It has no bearing on the gist of the petition.
And why are posts in an online forum by a person from another company to be believed over what's said on Amiga Inc.'s own web site? No change or correction has appeared there.
This is boring and ridiculous, but you said there were 2 errors in the summary of the petition, so let's guess again...
Quote:
"* AmigaOS will only be available bundled with such hardware."
So, once again let's go into technicalities. OS4 will also be sold separately to those who use ancient 68k Amigas with the old or forthcoming PPC expansions. Those who buy licensed POP mobos from the currently single licensee before OS4 and modified ROMs are available will also be able to buy OS4 + ROMs separately.
So? How is this relevant? How does it flaw the reasoning behind the petition? How does this matter to POP mobo distributors and those who wish to buy OS4 to run on those mobos? These are exceptions to the presented policies. It's technicalities. It's not within the scope of the petition.
Where are the "two whopping flaws"?
And why would people who say that a company's business policies are unethical have to watch their backs? Ethics is not law. Unethical != illegal. It's a person's or group's concepts of good and bad. I don't think what AI says conforms to my ethics 100%, but the petition and thus the undersigned don't say they're doing anything illegal.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 165 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by BigPoppa on 28-May-2002 01:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 162 (ch):
This is the biggest bunch of crap I have ever seen. If you all are investors in the corporation, then you have a right to say something. Otherwise, everyone is getting their panties in a bunch over a lot of "what-if's" and coulda, shoulda, wouldas. Amiga can do what Amiga thinks is right. A LOT of you are trying to hold onto the past and don't have the vision needed to see the Amiga move into the 21st century. Thank god I moved to the Macintosh with OS X!!!!
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 166 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 28-May-2002 02:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 164 (Seehund):
The whopping flaws are that you summarise the executive update and claim that it
makes two points which it clearly does not.
You have refused to listen to anyone on this, obviously. You see a criticism of the petition and you see red each time.
You are now taking it personally and seem to read any comment A as some convoluted non existing comment comment B.
Oh and accusing someone of unethical business practices != illegal, right but then I didnt say that did I? AInc didnt say 2/3 of the things you claim either so theres no change in your behaviour there then eh?
Congratulations Seehund in being so consistent in that and your sneering tone which does you so much credit.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 167 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 28-May-2002 02:37 GMT
> * Any hardware capable of running AmigaOS must first be modified with "AmigaOS specific extensions" to its "boot ROM" in order to be allowed to run AmigaOS.
Not that its been pointed out to you before but heres the biggest whopping flaw.
Go and read that executive update for once Seehund.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 168 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 28-May-2002 02:49 GMT
Oh and the *irony* of it is that you still had to guess as to what I thought the flaws with the petition were even though I had gone into detail about it on here.
Thats just too funny.
Anyway Seehund, you will notice if you take time to read what has been posted here that I think the petition is a good idea what I take issue with is the lack of accuracy which as I have already said will do the petitions credibility no good.
Perhaps now you have put that petition together and eventually you will edit the sigs and send it to Amiga Inc you will stop blowing hot air on here about it all. With your track record of listening to what people have to say will you listen to what THEY have to say? Dubious.
I am not going to continue to repeat my points which you have not answered so thats it Seehund - yep you will never hear me criticise the petition again. So, when you have finished picking sand out of your feathers you wont have to avoid reading another word.
Enjoy.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 169 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by gz on 28-May-2002 05:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 163 (Graham):
>Well, as has been pointed out, if I wanted to sell my Xyzzy PPC motherboard into the Amiga market, >I go to Amiga and get it certified, and then I can sell it into the Amiga market, with the OS at the same time.
The amiga market is so small that it is more than unlikely that any xyzzy pop motherboard manufacturer would ever want to try it out on our flea markets. Having to sign a compulsory licence deal with AI for getting a "permission" will even harder scare 3'rd party manufacturers away from us.
Why would any company outside amiga community want to go through such a strange legal proceeding when they don't have to do that in the "real" world? Especially when our small market doesen't seem to justify worth going through all the trouble.
In my opinion software is made for HW and not HW made for software. A strictly software company shouldn't be in a position allowing them to dictate hardware manufacturers of how to proceed with their products or how to sell them.
You can say that nobody has to sign the licence (which they don't) but that is no good for us customers either because it would leave us short with another possibly good HW choice. We can say all beautiful things we can think of this compulsory licence deal, but we will always end up with a closed market in which AInc has control over a market it does not own. Owning a brand name does not give you the right to claim control over an area of industry in which a software company has no part of.
Even microsoft with their dubious business "ethics" isn't dictating intel and amd what to do with their mobo design and selling.
No, the only market which allows a stunt like this pulled off, is the amiga market which has such a marginal and loyal following and where the hunger for seeing new products for the past 8 years has grown so big that it can blind them.
There are good aspects in the licence aswell, such as the stated software piratism control, and the quality of service assurance. However these things sound more like an excuse to me to cover the control over the market part of the deal. It's about securing profits of future AmigaOS's with the "expense" of 3'rd parties. In overall it's a good plan that can benefit AInc and the customer with possibly better and more reliable service.
It doesen't make it right to "gently force" HW manufacturers to secure Amiga Inc's profits, a task that the company should try to do themselves, one way or the other. It's ANY software company's own problem how they intend to tackle piratism in their products. It's not the problem of a 3'rd party HW company. They have their own problems, such as setting up a reliable service and help network. And if they don't do that, it should mean they don't get Amiga certified, BUT it shouldn't restrict them from selling a product freely in our market.
The freedom of choice should be on the customer.
Whew... Anyways that's all just my opinion so don't sweat it if you don't agree :)
I can't be more right than you are because we both have valid points, just from different sides of the coin.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 170 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anthony on 28-May-2002 06:49 GMT
Why don't you all just get a life. You don't own the Amiga, or have any right to dictate its business decisions, Amiga Inc. are obviously doing this would good reason, and will have spent far more time and resources than you ensuring the decision is the right one. I see 250 people have signed the petition, some of which support Amiga Inc. (so why they signed it I don't know!), hardly a majority in even this small community.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 171 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Jules on 28-May-2002 09:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 169 (gz):
> Having to sign a compulsory licence deal with AI for getting a "permission" will even harder scare 3'rd party manufacturers away from us.
If they want to supply 'Amiga' machines, it'd be no skin off their nose to sign. Once signed, there's absolutely nothing to stop such a manufacturer from supplying 2 versions of a machine, one called a 'POP' board, the other called an 'Amiga'. If the hardware manufacturer values the Amiga OS, then this agreement is not a show stopper as it doesn't limit any of their other targetted markets whatsoever.
> In my opinion software is made for HW and not HW made for software. A strictly software company shouldn't be in a position allowing them to dictate hardware manufacturers of how to proceed with their products or how to sell them.
Amiga don't dictate anything. The hardware manufacturer is free to do what they want. The only time conditions are made is if the hardware manufacturer wants to run the AmigaOS. In this instance Amiga make stipulations about use for this. Such stipulations still do not impact that harware manufacturers other business (i.e. they can carry on producing their pop boards aimed at other markets). For those who then buy 'Amigas', there's nothing stopping them loading on alternative OS'es later on.
> You can say that nobody has to sign the licence (which they don't) but that is no good for us customers either because it would leave us short with another possibly good HW choice.
Then put pressure on the relevant hardware manufacturer to sign up with Amiga to produce an Amiga computer.
> We can say all beautiful things we can think of this compulsory licence deal,
It's not compulsory. No hardware manufacturer is forced to sign. Thy are only required to sign if they value the AmigaOS and want to provide an Amiga. If they don't, I'd personally worry about buying hardware from them in the first place if what I want is a new Amiga.
> but we will always end up with a closed market in which AInc has control over a market it does not own.
No, it doesn't 'own' the hardware, but as part of the agreement to allow it's software to run, Amiga has certain requirements to be satisfied for such machines.
> Owning a brand name does not give you the right to claim control over an area of industry in which a software company has no part of.
It does if the hardware manufacturer wants to use any of Amigas intellectual property. If they want to use such property, then they have to conform to the regulations of use for that product. If they don't want to conform (and that's their decision) then they won't be allowed to use Amiga products. Considering that the rules of conformity are not outrageous, that's fair enough. Oce again, conformity does no impact that hardware manufacturers alternative markets.
> Even microsoft with their dubious business "ethics" isn't dictating intel and amd what to do with their mobo design and selling.
So what? Just because other companies aren't seen to be doing this, does that make Amigas strategy wrong?
> No, the only market which allows a stunt like this pulled off, is the amiga market which has such a marginal and loyal following and where the hunger for seeing new products for the past 8 years has grown so big that it can blind them.
Or maybe where the market is so small that Amiga cannot afford to lose a single sale to piracy at least in the early stages, and where the relevant hardware manufacturers want some return for their loyalty and their R&D (yes, this agreement is as much to do with helping the hardware manufacturers who have signed as it is to Amiga).
> There are good aspects in the licence aswell, such as the stated software piratism control, and the quality of service assurance. However these things sound more like an excuse to me to cover the control over the market part of the deal.
Why would it benefit Amiga to exert such 'control' if piracy and quality wasn't an issue? Basically, the benefit would be fairly minimal. The Amiga market is very very small. Amiga and associates cannot afford to lose any sales due to piracy at least in the initial period. The hardware companies who have signed have invested heavily into this project and they also need some return. This protects the AmigaOS and also protects the signed hardware manufacturers. It's not an exclusive deal and anyone who wants in on the action has the option to join. If you want to take this argument a little further, by Amiga protecting themselves and their partners in this way, they are also inadvertantly protecting the consumer; it wouldn't be in the consumers interest if the company they bought their hardware from goes bust, or even if Amiga go bust.
> It doesen't make it right to "gently force" HW manufacturers to secure Amiga Inc's profits,
Erm, it also secures the profits of those hardware manufacturers who join. As I said, choice lies with the hardware manufacturers.
> And if they don't do that, it should mean they don't get Amiga certified, BUT it shouldn't restrict them from selling a product freely in our market.
I think alot of people may be missing a vital point here. From everything I've seen, Amiga don't want Amiga 'Certified' machines. They want branded 'Amigas'. Look at it this way. A company starts out producing it's own hardware/software solution called 'XYZ'. It then outsources the manufacturing of the hardware part to another company. The hardware still has to conform to the originating company's specifications as part of the agreement. The ensuing product is still known as product 'XYZ'. The next logical progression would be to open up the market a little and say that any other manufacturer is welcome to produce 'XYZ' hardware SHOULD THEY WISH. That hardware still has to conform to 'XYZ' specs and will be called 'XYZ' (note, NOT 'XYZ Certified' or 'XYZ Compatible').
There are many advantages to this approach.
a) Product Definition
b) Product Awareness
c) Product Recognition
d) Product Quality
e) Product Compatibility
f) Product Support
g) Anti Software Piracy
h) The Chance For Harware Manufacturers to Enter A New Market
i) Guarantee Of Being Part Of The Future Amiga Roadmap
> The freedom of choice should be on the customer.
The freedome of choice still is with the customer. You'll have a choice of Shark based Amiga, AmigaOne, Classic PPC, hopefully Promethius. If sales are seen to be good, I'm sure other hardware manufacturers will be keen to join.
> Whew... Anyways that's all just my opinion so don't sweat it if you don't agree :)
Yep, I don't agree with the majority of what you said, but everyone is entitled to their opinions. Hope I haven't caused you to sweat with my ones :-)
> I can't be more right than you are because we both have valid points, just from different sides of the coin.
Such a shame that more people don't take that stance. Totally agree with you there (although remember, every coin has an edge) :-)
Rgds
Jules
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 172 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 28-May-2002 09:54 GMT
Seems like people has a hard time understanding the meaning of owning and protecting an Intellectual Property which the Amiga brand and the AmigaOS is. It's very simple and every commercial OS out there has this kind of licensing policy which the vendors has to follow in order to be able to sell the product at all. It's the only way to survive as a business today which most Amigans seems to have forgotten or simply don't realize due to being out of business for so many years.
So, this whole issue is only about some people needing a Reality Check(TM) because else there wouldn't be anything to discuss at all. To the rest of the world, all of this would basicly go without saying because it's common sense.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 173 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by SC on 28-May-2002 14:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 172 (Samface):
Frankly, the Amiga OS isn't going to be Amiga's "killer app" that'll make them rich - that's what AmigaAnywhere is for. But the AmigaOS would make a great way of breaking out into new markets and attracting attention, which would provide impetus for AmigaAnywhere - especially if both projects are integrated at some point.
Going 'open source' and setting up a development/renumeration scheme around it - could help:
(a) break into the x86 market (with an appropriate level of marketing)
(b) help attract support and dedication from the Linux user base.
(b) would be particularly impressed by the open-sourcing of the AmigaOSand a liberal hardware licensing policy, and this is precisely the market Amiga should be targetting with AmigaOS -- bringing them onboard so that AmigaAnywhere can benefit from the apps they develop for OS5/AA.
If AmigaOS is going to have any chance of expanding it's market, it needs to embrace as many different hardware combinations as possible - through an open approach to hardware - for both the numbers and to attract Linux types.
Leaving aside Open Source, Amiga can protect it's intellectual property through something called Copyright, and Copyright Enforcement. Conservative licensing laws will not harm the pirates, who will simply find a way around it as they always do. (Such types are *extremely* unlikely to spend good money on hardware, anyway.)
SC
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 174 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 28-May-2002 15:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 173 (SC):
The AmigaAnywhere is for breaking through the other markets, not the AmigaOS.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 175 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 28-May-2002 16:17 GMT
The only strange thing is that some people support the current licensing scheme
of Ainc. I agree with the petition, Amiga INC as a software company CAN not dictate to which hardware amigaos 4 will run or more elegantly stated to which
specific PPC motherboards.
I also dont understand how intelligent people can believe the statements about
quality assurance, helping the amiga community, strengthening the Amiga name etc
As a long time amiga user i *want* the AmigaOS to *FINALLY* break through stupid
restrictions and be availiable for *everyone* in the open market.
What i see in Amiga INC statements is the continuous struggle for *TOTAL* control of everything.
I WANT the amigaos4 to run on a variety of ppc motherboards.
I WANT to have a choice in buying different PPC motherboards.
I WANT to see the amigaos running on PPC hardware that is not Amiga certified.
I WANT to see the amigaos finally beeing availiable to non amiga hardcore users.
THEY dont want amigaos running on non certified motherboards, and my opinion is
not because of quality/piracy issues, they want to control the hw market as well.
A software company can not REQUIRE from hardware manufacturers to license amigaos AND sell amigaos with every mb sold.
This is stupid, unethical and it WILL definetely not increase the amiga user base.
Face it people, hyperion should try to make amigaos portable across different
PPC motherboards. AmigaINC should not care if my PPC motherboard can also run
MorphOS.
A LinuxPPC user buying Pegasos will never be able to run AmigaOS on it.
It is the job of Hyperion/Ainc to change the licensing scheme and NOT bplan or
<name of another ppc manufacturer here who doesnt give a fuck about amiga>
to license amigaos for its hardware.
Restriction is bad.
We want CHOICE people, CHOICE.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 176 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 28-May-2002 20:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (DaveW):
>The whopping flaws are that you summarise the executive update and claim that
>it makes two points which it clearly does not.
Which points? Spell them out, or at least cite the comment in which you listed these "flaws".
>You have refused to listen to anyone on this, obviously. You see a criticism
>of the petition and you see red each time.
You don't seem to be listening either. I have posted twice that I believe the massive signing of this petition is more to do with the negative opinions towards Amiga Inc rather than the original issue.
>AInc didnt say 2/3 of the things you claim either
Which things? Can you name them? Unless I've missed your comment naming them, possible in this long thread, and I apologise if I have. But please list these two things, or at least give the comment number where you did list them.
>Congratulations Seehund in being so consistent in that and your sneering tone
>which does you so much credit.
Your tone is often quite patronising. You also seem to have aligned your position to an extremely pro-Amiga Inc one... I'd be interested if you could back up your opinions...
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 177 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 29-May-2002 05:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 176 (smithy):
LOL Smithy. Please read back through the thread and you will see it spelled out.
I referenced ONE of your points and disregarded the point you made about general
discontent.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 178 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 29-May-2002 05:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 175 (Anonymous):
We need to create a market *BEFORE* we encourage competition on it. You see, the current Amiga market is non-profitable and desperately needs to be revitalized from scratch, another H&P vs. Phase5 War(TM) would not be it. I do NOT want competition and I only want ONE clear path forwards. There's not enough wanderers on this road in order to follow all the paths, let's stick to the mainroad until there are more of us.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 179 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 29-May-2002 05:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 177 (DaveW):
>LOL Smithy. Please read back through the thread and you will see it spelled
^^^
????
>out.
I don't have time to read through 170+ messages. All I wanted was a straight answer.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 180 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Alkemyst on 29-May-2002 06:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 175 (Anonymous):
>>The only strange thing is that some people support the current licensing scheme
of Ainc. I agree with the petition, Amiga INC as a software company CAN not dictate to which hardware amigaos 4 will run or more elegantly stated to which
specific PPC motherboards.
wrong Amiga.inc can didict what hardware AmigaOs runs on in OEM deals.
your confusing that with what the user can do with the hardware once bought.
& the fact is you need amiga extentions in the bios you need to go through amiga.inc to get them
& any firm or sales man are allowed to resfuse sale to allmost anyone.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 181 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Samface on 29-May-2002 06:54 GMT
Once upon a time, a company called "Amiga Inc." decides to create an OS. As they are not a hardware company they need hardware manufacturing partners.
Amiga Inc. sais: "Those who wants our OS to have support for their hardware, sign here."
Everyone signs it except one: bPlan.
bPlans supporters decides to blame Amiga Inc. for restricting their OS from usage with bPlans hardware.
Is it just me or does this just make no sense what so ever?
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 182 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 29-May-2002 09:19 GMT
...and frankly I no longer give a damn about trying to steer this into being a useful
and valid petition so say what you like.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 183 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by DaveW on 29-May-2002 15:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (smithy):
Smithy whats this you didnt read through before posting that all the problems that were raised were technicalities? Surely not!
I have no time to repost them or inclination, its here for the record. If you cant be bothered to research then thats your affair.
I think this petition is going to have no effect whatsoever. I think Seehund was right to start a petition and I respect him for that but I think he should have had his petition reviewed before starting it.
Dave.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 184 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Jun-2002 00:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (Troels E):
You are meek minded .Check again how many peopel have signed it. How many
people have gotten a A1, NONE. Already Bplan puts the so called A1xe to shame and its not out yet
and they dont knwo about G5 support . This jsut shows how crappy it is. Wake up
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 185 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Jun-2002 00:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Whtever Ben . Your True colors have been shown . You LIE . You cant compete with BPlan so you attack them saying they have your code.
Dam hyperion is a brown noser sad very sad. SO SHUT YOUR UGLY messy mouth.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 186 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Jun-2002 00:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 88 (Graham):
Let the fool GRaham speak and show how stupid he really is.
Petition: AmigaOS distribution policies and PPC hardware : Comment 187 of 187ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 02-Jun-2002 00:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 183 (DaveW):
Naw its right on the mark . idiots Amiga ,hyperion are trying to sue bplan. they have no proof
Anonymous, there are 187 items in your selection (but only 37 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 187]
Back to Top